April 12, 2007 Minutes (Neighborhood Resources Department)
|
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
|
Jeanette Collier, marci francisco, Susan Mangan, Greg Moore, Carol Nalbandian, Vern Norwood, Brenda Nunez, Kirsten Roussel, Mike Randolph, Patti Welty |
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS ABSENT: |
|
Curtis Harris |
|
|
|
|
|
STAFF PRESENT: |
|
Margene Swarts |
|
|
|
|
|
PUBLIC PRESENT: |
|
James Dunn, Janet Good, Tammy Kahle, Nancy Schwarting, KT Walsh |
Randolph called the meeting to order at 5:45 pm.
Introductions
Members and staff introduced themselves.
Approval of March 22, 2007 Minutes
Moore moved to approve the March 22, 2007 minutes. Welty seconded the motion, which passed.
Miscellaneous/Calendar Items
It was decided to cancel the April 26 meeting and meet May 10. If business is finished tonight, the meeting with the City Commission (CC) about the update to the plan will be April 24. It will not be another public hearing but the CC has traditionally placed the item on the regular agenda so people can make comments. Staff and the Committee Chair will speak and the CC has traditionally adopted the Committee’s recommendations. At the May 10 meeting the Committee can plan the summer meeting schedule and can also plan to relay information on performance measures to subgrantees. They will also want to decide on neighborhood association (NA) allocation specifics. Any members who cannot make the meeting should email comments to staff.
The Committee recessed to conduct the Public Hearing (PH) at 6:00 p.m.
Conduct Public Hearing
Members, Staff and public introduced themselves.
Randolph said there were some changes made this year during the allocations process. Neighborhoods were considered more objectively based on population, percent of owner-occupants, and percent of low-mod residents. Moreover, neighborhood funding was made in a lump sum so that neighborhoods can decide what they want to do with the funds.
Staff gave a brief overview of the 2007 Action Plan.
Randolph opened public comment.
Janet Good, ELNA, commented on the sidewalk repair project that was not funded. It did not seem worthwhile for the amount of money requested but they put a lot of thought into dual problems they are facing in their neighborhood. She passed out some photos of sidewalk repair projects in the neighborhood. They take the pedestrian environment seriously. East Lawrence (EL) has the worst sidewalks in town and a large number of rentals and landlords are not fixing their sidewalks. The other problem that has been increasing in the neighborhood is vandalism – they have done outreach with the junior high and they were excited to try to give kids a sense of investment. EL has been characterized as a crime-ridden ghetto and this rubs off on youth – this project would show them that EL is a really cool neighborhood that people care about it. They will put it on the request every year and the neighborhood is going to keep looking for ways to reach out to kids.
Norwood said she can see where it would be a benefit to have them repaired for elderly and children. She used to live in EL and the sidewalks there are a real hazard.
Good said they have 100 year old brick sidewalks that are in great shape. Others that have not been installed or maintained properly deteriorate very quickly. EL is trying to be creative and work together to solve their problems.
KT Walsh, ELNA, added to what Good said – the project involves two skilled stone masons, non-profit coordinators - it is a great project. She asked if 2005 census numbers were automatically inserted because EL is bigger than she thought. She felt strongly about coordinators making a living wage and she understands how the lump sum could work. She asked how the committee felt about a living wage for coordinators.
Randolph said the discussion centered more on disparity among neighborhoods. When they decided to not break salaries out separately the discussion kind of left the living wage discussion. The Committee will consider if a cap should be put in place for salaries.
James Dunn, ONA, clarified that the allocation for neighborhoods can be expended based on how neighborhoods see fit.
Staff said as long as the activity is eligible and as long as it has been mentioned in the application, they can do it. Swarts wants to ask the Committee what they think in terms of limits as far as operating/coordinator/cleanup – within guidelines staff will ask NAs what they plan to do with the funds. If a NA decides they want to do something different from what was stated in the application, staff will decide whether to bring the change back to the Committee or whether it can be approved by staff.
Dunn said the Investment Summary includes a contingency amount that seems a bit high.
Randolph said Habitat for Humanity made a request for roughly that amount for water development fees. The Committee and Habitat has asked of the CC that those fees be waived by the City. The Committee wants to hold the funds in contingency until they know the status of the request.
Dunn pointed out that there was an error with the ONA boundaries.
Walsh said a lot of people have asked why ONA is getting so much this year. Some have said that with only 9% owner-occupied, are we using some CDBG funds to help landlords? It would help to know.
Roussel said it looks like a lot there because allocations have been combined. When comparing the total amount with past allocations it is not a significant change. When the Committee looked at neighborhoods the first thing they did was look at total number of households because they felt communication between the NA and households will have an impact on expenses. The Committee then took into account the percentage of owner-occupants and percent of low-mod residents.
Walsh asked if they were considering adding percentage of blight to the equation.
Randolph said if they were able to quantify blight they would be considering adding it to the equation.
Walsh said a lot of students are poor and they are being counted as low-income in Oread.
Francisco said if you look at the population, there is a local requirement that we deliver a newsletter to every household in the neighborhood. That cost in a larger neighborhood is substantially more. She is interested in looking at the blight question to make sure it is being addressed. The problem with rentals is that ONA faces more rezoning questions than other neighborhoods because they have multi-family zoning – it is difficult. It is more awkward for homeowners that are there because the population keeps changing and it is harder to communicate with neighbors if they are so transient. Adding blight would be a good thing to do.
Walsh thanked the Committee for answering questions and said she likes the idea of adding in blight.
Tammy Kahle, HCCI, thanked the Committee for working hard on the budget.
Randolph closed the PH and reconvened the regular Committee meeting at 6:35 p.m.
Reconvene Meeting – Discuss Changes, if necessary
Randolph asked for additional comments.
Collier clarified that the ELNA project included costs for t-shirts, which is ineligible.
Swarts said yes.
Collier asked about the change in neighborhood populations and what that means for this year – did they remove students?
Swarts said staff does not know what caused the drop, but intends to investigate the reason for the change. As staff gets more information, it will be passed on to the Committee.
Nalbandian said it has implications for the future.
Swarts suggested proceeding based on information that was available when the Committee made initial allocations.
Francisco said it would help neighborhoods to identify limits the Committee is putting on salaries for coordinators.
Swarts said that would be an item on the May 10 agenda.
Mangan moved to approve the 2007 Investment Summary as presented. Moore seconded the motion, which passed.
Dunn announced that April is Fair Housing month and there will be an event April 27 at the Holidome sponsored by Human Resources and the Landlords of Lawrence. Saturday, April 28 is the Tenant Fair at the Arts Center.
Adjourn
There being no further business, francisco moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:45 p.m. Moore seconded the motion, which passed.